Totally inadequate ordinance proposal

To the Editor:

Creators of the proposed hazardous vegetation management ordinance convey little recognition of the dire nature of wildfire threat to Tuolumne County. During the recent Washington Fire, what saved the rest of Sonora from destruction was the lack of wind and ready availability of equipment due to lack of need elsewhere. Basically, what now needs to be addressed is fuel reduction.

Requiring undeveloped property to have 30 feet of reduced fuel zone clearance along any portion of a property line adjacent to a neighboring habitable or occupied building within 100 feet can leave the remainder of that undeveloped property at maximum wildfire risk. Where is the fuel reduction?

The Williamson Act is no reason to excuse a landowner from full compliance. Either there is danger that must be mitigated, or there isn't. These owners are asked to create a reduced fuel plan approved by the Tuolumne County fire chief. Why a reduced plan? In what time frame? Subject to one person's approval? Again, no guarantee of fuel reduction.

How should we interpret Section 8.14.080 “No Duty To Enforce”? Does this make the ordinance unenforceable?

All of our current supervisors campaigned with a promise to address the wildfire threat as top priority. Some talked about writing a strong ordinance addressing undeveloped land, and the need to tailor defensive space recommendations for all property according to the varying needs of the terrain of our county. Supervisors have the final say. They can and must come up with an ordinance that can effectively reduce wildfire risk and place the safety of all before the economic interests of a few.

Ed Fernandez

Sonora